Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Pious Perverts
See other Pious Perverts Articles

Title: Rand Paul on Bradley Manning Verdict: “I don’t have a lot of sympathy”
Source: ECONOMIC POLICY JOURNAL
URL Source: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.co ... bradley-manning-verdict-i.html
Published: Aug 20, 2013
Author: ROBERT WENZEL
Post Date: 2013-08-20 09:48:40 by Artisan
Ping List: *RAND PAUL*     Subscribe to *RAND PAUL*
Keywords: None
Views: 1553
Comments: 92

There's terrible news out about Rand Paul and comments he has made about Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden.

At a Cato University event, Rand stated that there need to be some laws that protect certain secrets and that Manning put many lives at risk by releasing millions of pages “willy-nilly,” reports DL Magazine.

“There do have to be laws to protect some secrets. I think if you’ve got the, you know, the plans on how to make a nuclear bomb that is a state secret. If you give that to the enemy, that is being treasonous,” said Rand, “Even if you reveal it, you just have to have laws against that. What Manning did was just willy-nilly, just released millions of pages of things and I think some people have said there is potentially some harm from that. You know individual agents that could have been killed or put at risk from this. So there is a problem with that. So I just can’t support that.”

“If you are doing something for a political purpose; you know, in fact, in some ways the Snowden case is a little bit different,” said Paul, “But even with the Snowden case, I still think you have to have laws against what he did. So he did break the law.”

His continued his comments about Snowden in an even more muddled fashion, attempting to hide is views by saying what others might do and not showing any strong support for Snowden

“Snowden, if he were here, could maybe make the defense ‘Well I released this information because I’m a whistle blower. I’m telling you the head of the intelligence agency isn’t telling the truth. So I’m correcting a lie by another official.’ Some have said he would have had an easier time with that argument if he had come to a member of Congress and gone through the official whistleblower, kind of, pathway,” said Paul, “I think they still would have probably put him in jail and thrown away the key.”

DL reported on reaction from the libertarian community on Rand's comments.

The District of Columbia’s Libertarian Party Chairman, Ryan Sabot stated that Rand's “attempts to wipe away credibility, gravity, and value of both Snowden and Manning’s leaks by Senator Paul are distasteful.”

Jayel Aheram, blogger for Young Americans for Liberty, said that he was"disappointed that Sen. Rand Paul chose repeat the lie that Manning’s release and Wikileaks’ publication of the diplomatic cables harmed people. Brig. General Robert Carr, the man who was in charge of the Pentagon’s review of the leaks, admitted during Manning’s trial that no one was killed or harmed by the release of the cables."

Young Americans for Liberty NY State Chair, Taweh Beysolow II said:

It’s very obvious to me that Senator Paul would be against what Bradley Manning and Snowden did simply because he is a politician who has presidential aspirations within the Republican Party. The broad conservative movement does not have sympathy, nor feels empathy for either of these individuals because they feel as if they betrayed this country to some degree, despite how much it works against the Obama administration to their pleasure.Again, it serves more as a reminder that Senator Paul will most likely mimic a George Bush presidency rather than the ideal pie in the sky dream of a libertarian president in my opinion. Subscribe to *RAND PAUL*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 92.

#31. To: Artisan, 4 (#0)

There do have to be laws to protect some secrets. - Rand Paul

I'd like to know which Manning & Snowden secrets, to date, Rand Paul objects to?

Rand is the ultimate Trojan Jew.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2013-11-16   9:15:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Jethro Tull (#31)

Rand is the ultimate Trojan Jew.

Olde Ron was the sly one.

Always when asked if he was in favor of foreign aid to Israel, olde Ron replied, "I am against all foreign aid".

Cynicom  posted on  2013-11-16   9:29:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Cynicom (#33)

Always when asked if he was in favor of foreign aid to Israel, olde Ron replied, "I am against all foreign aid".

Yes, how sly to have a principle and conviction that applies to all foreign aid and sticking to it. Our Constitution has no provisions for foreign aid and it really is sly is to stick to the Constitution consistently. There really is something sinister about following the Constitution and sticking to principles, even more sinister to do so consistently.

abraxas  posted on  2013-11-16   10:54:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: abraxas, James Deffenbach (#39)

Abs...James...

A great deal of our brainwashing and programming has been via the art of omission.

Cynicom  posted on  2013-11-16   11:23:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Cynicom (#41)

I know that but I still don't know what you found so wrong in Ron's reply. He showed himself to be even handed and that he had some principles. At least that is how I understood it.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-11-16   11:44:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: James Deffenbach (#42)

I know that but I still don't know what you found so wrong in Ron's reply.

James...

The questions asked were always of the definitive type, requiring only a yes or no answer.

Cynicom  posted on  2013-11-16   12:01:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Cynicom (#43)

James...

The questions asked were always of the definitive type, requiring only a yes or no answer.

Yes, and you know as well as I do that if Ron had answered a specific question about foreign aid to Israel with a simple yes or no answer--and the answer would be no of course if you are against all foreign aid--then he would have been painted as an anti-Semite. That is why they didn't ask about foreign aid in general.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-11-16   13:25:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: James Deffenbach (#46)

Yes, and you know as well as I do that if Ron had answered a specific question about foreign aid to Israel with a simple yes or no answer--and the answer would be no of course if you are against all foreign aid--then he would have been painted as an anti-Semite. That is why they didn't ask about foreign aid in general.

All I know is that Paul has never answered the questions, for whatever reasons.

Doing thus paints anyone into the realm of professional politician.

Cynicom  posted on  2013-11-16   14:46:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: Cynicom, abraxas, James Deffenbach, All (#49)

#33: Olde Ron was the sly one. Always when asked if he was in favor of foreign aid to Israel, olde Ron replied, "I am against all foreign aid".

#41: A great deal of our brainwashing and programming has been via the art of omission.

#43: The questions asked were always of the definitive type, requiring only a yes or no answer.

#49: All I know is that Paul has never answered the questions, for whatever reasons. Doing thus paints anyone into the realm of professional politician.

Your charges against Ron Paul as if he dodged giving clear answers about his position on questions of Foreign Aid to Israel are absolutely not true, Cynicom.

GreyLmist  posted on  2013-11-17   0:04:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: Cynicom, abraxas, James Deffenbach, All (#57) (Edited)

charges against Ron Paul as if he dodged giving clear answers about his position on questions of Foreign Aid to Israel are absolutely not true

Ron Paul: Cut Foreign Aid, Unshackle Israel, Leave Iran Alone - FOX interview at 1:49-2:57 of 6.25 minute video

Uploaded on Aug 12, 2011

From the Transcript at ronpaul.com for the FOX interview above:

News Anchor: Our viewers ask better questions than I do, so let me get right to some of them, talking about where you stand. Don Peterson in Hemet, California wants to know, “Where does Mr. Paul stand on Israel? He seems to have dodged the question [every time] he’s been asked.”

Ron Paul: I disagree with him, because I don’t. We should be friends with Israel, and I don’t think we do a very good job at it. But I don’t think giving money to our friends is the right thing to do. I’m against all foreign aid, and if we cut out all the foreign aid today we would cut out 7 times more foreign aid from the enemies of Israel. But I wouldn’t give foreign aid to Israel. I want Israel to have their own national sovereignty. I don’t want them to depend on us either for the money which socializes their economy and they’re in financial trouble as well, and I don’t want them to depend on us to tell them how to draw up their peace treaties or what to do with their borders. So yes, we should have friendship with them, we should trade with them, but total dependence on United States and on our money is a bad risk for them because we’re in bankruptcy. We’re not going to be there forever, we are going to come home and I think their dependency on us is very, very harmful to them.

Ron Paul against foreign aid to Israel - 1 minute video

Uploaded on Dec 5, 2011

Ron Paul against foreign aid to Israel at the CNN National Security Debate

Ron Paul: Foreign Policy & Israel - 4:32 to 5:19 of 7 minute video interview by Jack Hunter

Uploaded on Dec 8, 2011

Ron Paul on Isreal, Foreign Aid and U.S. Foreign Policy - 10 minute video of a reading from Ron Paul's book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, based on written notes during his 2008 presidential campaign.

Israel and Foreign Aid at start to 3:10

Edit to add Quote section and spacing + bracketed correction at the Transcription section, paragraph 1.

GreyLmist  posted on  2013-11-17   4:00:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: GreyLmist (#58)

Ron Paul: I disagree with him, because I don’t. We should be friends with Israel, and I don’t think we do a very good job at it. But I don’t think giving money to our friends is the right thing to do. I’m against all foreign aid, and if we cut out all the foreign aid today we would cut out 7 times more foreign aid from the enemies of Israel. But I wouldn’t give foreign aid to Israel. I want Israel to have their own national sovereignty. I don’t want them to depend on us either for the money which socializes their economy and they’re in financial trouble as well, and I don’t want them to depend on us to tell them how to draw up their peace treaties or what to do with their borders. So yes, we should have friendship with them, we should trade with them, but total dependence on United States and on our money is a bad risk for them because we’re in bankruptcy. We’re not going to be there forever, we are going to come home and I think their dependency on us is very, very harmful to them.

Uhhhh...

Lot of words there. Heard it many times, never a yes or no. Ron always sounds a lot like a professional politician.

OBFUSCATE

Verb 1. obfuscate - make obscure or unclearobfuscate - make obscure or unclear

alter, change, modify - cause to change; make different; cause a transformation

One of them even gives an example of someone that is an expert at such...DOCTORS...

Find me a plain olde yes or no. No obfuscation allowed.

Cynicom  posted on  2013-11-17   4:42:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Cynicom (#59)

Uhhhh...

Lot of words there. Heard it many times, never a yes or no. Ron always sounds a lot like a professional politician.

OBFUSCATE

[...]

Find me a plain olde yes or no. No obfuscation allowed.

Professional Obfuscation is the paid poster realm you are painting yourself into on Ron Paul issues. Go try to find what you've ordered from me. It's not his answers that are evasive/non-existant (as you asserted at #49) but your premises that are wrong, and that has already been demonstrated. Ron Paul was not asked a yes or no question in the transcribed example (as you claimed at #43 they all were) but where he stood on Israel and he very clearly addressed in 7 words among those statements what his position was on Foreign Aid to Israel and then why. All you are proving is that he could say or do nothing to your liking and that you have nothing good to say about him -- even to the point that you seem to care more about imprinting bad impressions of him on people by slinging mud than you do about veracity. There's actually some terminology for that as a manipulative media tactic but it will take me a while to look that up. Will post it when I find it again. In the meantime, who do you suggest as a modern role model Constitutionally for the generations after yours, since you apparently are mission-bound to deny us even one of our own choosing if it's Ron Paul? Try to think of someone besides Jimmy Hoffa or whatever other Union Industry affiliates you esteem.

GreyLmist  posted on  2013-11-17   9:21:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: Cynicom, 4 (#65)

you seem to care more about imprinting bad impressions of [Ron Paul] on people by slinging mud than you do about veracity. There's actually some terminology for that as a manipulative media tactic but it will take me a while to look that up.

Excerpts from a scientificamerican.com article: Lingering Lies: The Persistent Influence of Misinformation

After people realize the facts have been fudged, they do their best to set the record straight: judges tell juries to forget misleading testimony; newspapers publish errata. But even explicit warnings to ignore misinformation cannot erase the damage done, according to a new study from the University of Western Australia.

This result shows that “even if you understand, remember and believe the retractions, this misinformation will still affect your inferences,” says Western Australia psychologist Ullrich Ecker, an author of the study. Our memory is constantly connecting new facts to old and tying different aspects of a situation together, so that we may still unconsciously draw on facts we know to be wrong to make decisions later.

GreyLmist  posted on  2013-11-24   6:14:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 92.

        There are no replies to Comment # 92.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 92.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest